Maggie Chapman
Scottish Green Party · Scotland
“Our prison system is not working. Like so many other institutions, including our national health service and our schools, prisons reflect the society that they serve. That society is deeply unfair and profoundly unequal. Schools struggle to help young people to learn and thrive, as too many children arrive in the classroom hungry.”
“Overall levels of crime are about half what they were in 1991. However, we have left prisons, just like our schools and NHS, to pick up the pieces of failures elsewhere in society.”
“Far too often, we take people who have already been failed by society and place them in institutions that fail them again—institutions that are increasingly unable to guarantee basic standards of welfare, dignity and human rights.”
“For those who have committed less serious crimes and are serving shorter sentences, it makes no sense at all to spend, as the motion states, £52,000 per year on prison, given that we know that, in many cases, prison will not help them to stop reoffending.”
“With greater use of effective alternatives to custody, and sentencing that follows the evidence, we will need fewer but better resourced prisons that can genuinely support rehabilitation and reintegration. That approach is working right now in other countries.”
“It is no surprise, then, that prisons often perform worse than alternatives when it comes to reducing reoffending and preventing future harm. Short sentences for non-violent crimes, in particular, for which there are the clearest alternatives, result in some of the highest rates of prisoners leaving prison and coming into conflict with th…”
The complete record
Every one of 814 lines we hold for Maggie Chapman, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 3 of 17.
“We must stop locking up people—especially women, as Rona Mackay highlighted—who do not pose a risk to others. Instead, we must invest in community justice, housing first, and mental health and addiction services that people can access without entering the justice system at all. Those who are incarcerated need the staff who support them to have the support, training and equipment that they need. As Pauline McNeill and others have recognised, staff should not have their own health and safety compromised as a consequence of incidents involving substance misuse.”
“The committee report sets out clear and practical recommendations: validated assessment tools, scaling up specialist services, strengthening pre-release planning, improving continuity of care and expanding treatment conditions in community disposals. Those must be implemented in full and without delay. However, we should not mistake implementation for completion. If prisons remain overcrowded, remand continues to be overused and short sentences persist for low-level offending, we will continue to recycle people through systems that exacerbate instability, harm and ill health. As Elena Whitham said, such punishment cannot support recovery. The Scottish Greens believe that we must reduce the prison population as a matter of urgency—not recklessly, but responsibly and in a way that is evidence led.”
“The debate has reinforced something that many of us already knew: substance misuse in prison is not incidental; it is endemic and, as Elena Whitham highlighted, it reflects deeper failures long before someone reaches the prison gate. We have heard about the treatment gap— hundreds enter custody with alcohol dependence each year, yet only a fraction receive specialist support. We have heard about substitution with synthetic drugs. We have heard about the spike in deaths after release. Behind every statistic is a person—often someone who has experienced trauma, violence, poverty or being in care. Too many are criminalised for behaviours that are rooted in unmet need.”
“Justice must mean healing, restoration and addressing the root causes of harm rather than simply punishing its symptoms. The committee’s report gives us a road map, but the question for Parliament is whether we are brave enough to follow it, not just by tweaking services but by reimagining what justice looks like in Scotland. The Scottish Greens stand ready to support action that treats substance use as a health issue, reduces our reliance on imprisonment and centres dignity, compassion and evidence. If we truly believe that people can change, our system must also change. 16:14”
“We should ensure that medication assisted treatment is universally and proactively available, not just for opioids but for alcohol dependence. We must guarantee that no one leaves custody without housing; healthcare registration; a prescription, if required; and a live appointment in the community. The weeks after release are the most dangerous and we cannot continue to discharge people into homelessness and expect recovery to follow. We should go further. We must confront the uncomfortable truth that incarceration itself can deepen harm. When women who are leaving prison are nine times more likely to die from alcohol-related causes than the general population, that demands more than incremental reform—it demands transformation.”
“We must, however, also be honest that implementing the recommendations remains at the current scale of imprisonment will only ever be a sticking plaster. Scotland imprisons too many people. Many of them are there for short sentences that are linked to poverty, addiction or low-level offending. We know that short custodial sentences are ineffective, destabilising and criminogenic, yet we continue to rely on them. If 63 per cent of the prison population has alcohol use disorder, that is not a prison problem but a public health emergency that is playing out behind bars. We should therefore be dramatically expanding community-based disposals with robust treatment requirements. We should be embedding trauma- informed care across the justice system. We should be piloting prison-based overdose prevention centres.”
“Prisons are being asked to manage what are fundamentally health crises. Overcrowding, extended lock‑up, lack of purposeful activity and fractured mental health provision create conditions in which substances become coping mechanisms. When alcohol is less available, we see substitution with synthetic drugs, which are often more dangerous, unpredictable and harmful, and prison officers are left to pick up the pieces, whether or not they have had the appropriate training or have the correct personal protective equipment. This is not about individual moral failure but about systemic neglect. The Scottish Greens support the committee’s recommendations on consistent assessment, closing the treatment gap, strengthening pre-release planning and improving continuity of care.”
“I begin by thanking the Criminal Justice Committee for its work on this inquiry. The evidence that it heard and included in the report is sobering, urgent and, frankly, politically and morally challenging. Let us begin with the reality: almost two thirds of people in our prisons have alcohol use disorder, and around 40 per cent were drunk at the time of their offence, yet referrals to specialist alcohol services remain vanishingly small compared with the scale of need. That is not simply a service gap—it is a political choice. The committee’s report makes it clear that substance misuse in prison is not an isolated problem. It is the predictable outcome of trauma, poverty, inequality and a system that too often warehouses distress rather than responding to it. If we are serious about justice, we must be serious about public health.”
“To ask the Scottish Government what assessment the finance secretary has made of the impact of lengthy national budget consultation processes on the financial sustainability of third sector organisations in north-east Scotland. (S6O- 05559)”
“Labour promised change. On WASPI, it has delivered continuity with the worst instincts of its predecessors. It has chosen to balance the books on the backs of women who were born in the 1950s. That decision is shameful, immoral and inhumane. Justice delayed has already been justice denied for too many. The UK Government must reverse its decision, implement the ombudsman’s recommendations and provide fair compensation. WASPI women have shown real resilience and dignity; they should not have to show endless patience, too. I stand with them, and I will not stop demanding justice. 17:25”
“Many of those women were already financially vulnerable before the state pension age changed. The failure to notify them properly compounded that vulnerability and pushed many into real hardship. I have spoken to women in the north-east— including Linda Carmichael—who have had to take on insecure work in their 60s, who burned through modest savings, who relied on food banks, who postponed retirement plans, and who felt humiliated and betrayed. These are not abstract statistics; they are our constituents— women who built our communities. The UK Labour Government says that public finances are under pressure, but it is wholly unfair to argue that there is no case for compensation when the independent ombudsman has found that there was maladministration. Compensation will not be a windfall or a bonus; it is redress for a wrong.”
“That is not equality or fairness; it is a failure of Government. Around 3.6 million women across the UK were affected, and the WASPI campaign estimates that at least 400,000 of them have died during the course of that long campaign. They died waiting and being denied justice. That injustice did not happen in isolation. By their late 50s, women’s pension wealth is equivalent to just 62 per cent of men’s: there is a 38 per cent gender pension gap. Some 23 per cent of single women pensioners in Scotland live in relative poverty. Two thirds of pension credit claimants are women. Women are more likely to have had interrupted careers because they were caring for children, parents and disabled partners. In Scotland, 19 per cent of women aged 45 to 75 and over provide regular unpaid care.”
“The Department for Work and Pensions failed to properly communicate the increase in the state pension age. That finding was never contested. The ombudsman recommended compensation of between £1,000 and £2,950 for each of the 3.6 million women affected. Yet, despite being forced to reconsider its original refusal, the UK Labour Government has chosen to double down. It has chosen to ignore the ombudsman, to ignore the 336,000 women here in Scotland and to show what WASPI women campaigners have rightly described as utter contempt. Let us be clear about the scale of that injustice. In Scotland alone, almost 336,000 women were affected. Many received as little as one year’s notice of up to a six-year increase in their state pension age. Compare that to men, who had six years’ notice of a one-year rise.”
“I am grateful to Bill Kidd for his motion and for giving me the opportunity to contribute this evening. I do so in anger, in solidarity and in absolute determination to see justice done for WASPI women. For years, my party, the Scottish Greens, and I have stood in this chamber and outside it with women campaigning against state pension inequality. I have stood with them at rallies, at the cross-party group meetings and at packed public meetings across the north-east. I have met campaigners from Aberdeen and Aberdeenshire, from Dundee and Angus—women who did everything that was asked of them, who worked, who cared, who paid in and who were then blindsided by a state that simply failed to tell them that the rules had changed. The Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman found maladministration.”
“It is about whether we accept a system that leaves one of Scotland’s largest local authority areas persistently underfunded and one of its key NHS boards struggling to meet demand. Communities in the north-east are resilient and resourceful, but they should not be expected to compensate indefinitely for structural underfunding. A fair share of funding is not a special favour; it is a matter of equity and dignity. It is essential if we are to build a Scotland in which every community—rural, coastal, urban or island—can access the public services that it needs and deserves. 13:18”
“If we are serious about relieving pressures on the NHS, we must invest upstream and fund preventative services properly. We must recognise that good social care, accessible local transport, warm and secure housing and strong community facilities are not optional extras but the foundations of a healthy society. Aberdeenshire’s rapidly ageing population should be a call to action, not an afterthought. Fair funding must take into account changing demographics, rurality and deprivation, all of which can be hidden in affluent-looking areas. The real cost of delivering services across large dispersed communities must be acknowledged. This debate is about whether we are willing to match our rhetoric on equality with meaningful financial commitment.”
“I was proud to stand alongside communities across Aberdeenshire in their fight to save sheltered housing, disability services and community care facilities that enable people— particularly older and disabled people—to live independently and with dignity. I pay tribute to those from Cuminestown, Portsoy and all the other northern Aberdeenshire towns and villages for their campaigns last summer. I am sorry that we did not halt all the closures and cuts. When sheltered housing accommodation and wardens are cut, daycare services for disabled people are reduced and local facilities close— decisions that were made by Conservative councillors—the cost does not disappear. It is displaced on to families, unpaid carers and, ultimately, our NHS.”
“The numbers that we see in the motion are not abstract—they are not simply lines in a spreadsheet. They represent delayed care, overstretched staff and anxious families and communities who are worried about the future of the services that they rely on. In Aberdeenshire, geography matters. Rural and island communities cover vast distances; roads must be maintained across huge areas; public transport must connect disparate and scattered towns and villages; and services must withstand extreme weather events that are becoming more frequent and more severe. Delivering equity in such circumstances requires more resource, not less, and I think that we agree on that. However, this is not simply a question of fairness between local authorities or health boards; it is about social justice.”
“However, it is also true that Aberdeenshire Council is the fourth lowest funded local authority in Scotland, and that it receives less per head than the national average. It is also true that NHS Grampian is the second lowest funded health board per capita, with a deficit of nearly £50 million and only 1.4 beds per 1,000 people, despite serving one of the fastest- growing elderly populations in the country. I agree that that creates significant challenges that other health boards do not face. I appreciate that the local authority funding allocation is devised by a formula that is agreed by COSLA, but perhaps it is time to open up discussion about that formula and the allocation. However, we cannot do that on our own in the Scottish Parliament—that is not in our gift.”
“I am grateful to Alexander Burnett for the opportunity to speak in this debate for the communities of the north-east, and particularly the people of Aberdeenshire, who know all too well what it means to be asked to do more with less. However, he and I have quite different solutions to the problems that his motion identifies: I support higher taxation on individuals and businesses with significant wealth. I am proud that Scotland has a fairer tax system than anywhere else in the UK, which is thanks to the Scottish Greens. At its heart, however, the debate is about how public spending is prioritised. Karen Adam was right to highlight that it is Mr Burnett’s Conservative colleagues who are making the decisions in the shire.”
“To ask the First Minister whether he will provide an update on the development of a just transition plan for the north-east of Scotland, including how communities and workers have been engaged. (S6F-04691)”
“That is the prize, but securing it requires urgency, Governments working in lockstep and genuine community and worker leadership and co-design from the outset. A just transition for Mossmorran is inseparable from one for the north-east. If Mossmorran becomes another unmanaged collapse, trust in the transition will erode further. If it becomes a turning point away from reactive crisis management towards strategic, worker-led planning, we will send a powerful signal that offshore workers will not be abandoned. This is about dignity and security. It is about ensuring that climate action strengthens, rather than sacrifices, our communities. The north-east is ready to lead—to be the powerhouse of Scotland’s new economy. However, the Government must act with us, boldly and coherently, now. 16:31”
“When ExxonMobil distributes billions of pounds to shareholders while closing a plant that sustained our industrial economy for decades, that is not a market inevitability but a political choice to protect elite interests. Will the North Sea and the north-east be next? We cannot drill ourselves out of decline. Even with new licences, reliance on imports will rise, and much of what remains is oil for export. Promising long-term security from a shrinking basin is not solidarity; it is false hope. We cannot allow multinational corporations to dictate the pace and shape of the transition. The opportunity is enormous: research from Robert Gordon University shows that job losses in oil and gas can be exceeded by growth in sectors such as offshore wind if we invest in domestic supply chains and manufacturing.”
“Delaying intervention only deepens the long-term costs through unemployment, skills loss and hollowed-out communities. That is not just economic failure; it is a betrayal of people. I am proud that the Scottish Greens fought for and secured the £500 million just transition fund for the north-east and Moray, but a fund is not a strategy. Funding those who profit from the status quo will not deliver a just transition. Without binding workforce guarantees, clear timelines and alignment between energy policy, industrial planning and skills investment, we will repeat the same mistakes. Mossmorran should have had a funded transition framework long before its closure was announced. Workers and unions should have shaped its future, not been forced to react to corporate decisions.”
“After 50 years of drilling, the most productive days of the North Sea are over. That is not ideology; it is geology. Gas production is in steep decline and the number of jobs that are supported by oil and gas has more than halved in the past decade, yet we still do not have a coherent published energy strategy and just transition plan from the Scottish Government. Workers are being told to trust in a transition that has not been properly planned. I speak regularly to constituents who are offshore workers, engineers, contractors and apprentices. They are not climate deniers. They know that change is coming; what they fear is chaos, unmanaged decline, falling pay and conditions, and decisions that are made in distant boardrooms.”
“What is happening at Mossmorran is not an isolated industrial event; it is a test of whether Scotland is serious about delivering a just transition. I say that as an MSP for North East Scotland, a region that has powered this country for half a century and that now stands at the sharpest edge of energy transition. Uplift and others are clear that the closure of the Mossmorran plant follows a familiar and worrying pattern, with record shareholder payouts but no credible plan for workers; reactive mitigation after closure announcements but no proactive industrial strategy; and scrambling to respond instead of shaping outcomes. We saw that at Grangemouth, we are seeing it at Mossmorran, and workers across the north-east are watching. The truth is that what happens at Mossmorran will shape confidence in the transition across my region.”
“The cabinet secretary still has time to make that commitment, and I urge her to do so later this evening. 19:26”
“Given the successful legal challenge that took place in Northern Ireland, the cabinet secretary will know that there are concerns that a challenge could also succeed here. The cabinet secretary received a letter from Together and the Humanist Society Scotland saying that an independent right to withdraw “is the only approach that is compatible with children’s human rights, and it is the only approach that will provide a clear, equitable, and legally resilient settlement.” I will deal with part 2 of the bill in my closing speech. For now, I will end my opening speech by saying that we must listen to the experts. The Scottish Government must give a clear commitment today that it will consult on an independent right to withdraw should it be re- elected after May.”
“Many other powers have so languished. That would be completely unacceptable. I am not an expert in children’s rights. With respect, neither is the cabinet secretary—nor is Stephen Kerr, and nor is Paul O’Kane. However, the Children and Young People’s Commissioner is, as are Professor Angela O’Hagan and the Scottish Human Rights Commission. Children in Scotland and the Children’s Parliament are experts, too, as are Kibble, Save the Children, UNICEF, the Scottish Child Law Centre and many more organisations besides. Without exception, they are all saying that, without the independent right, to quote the Scottish Human Rights Commission, “Part 1 in its current form does not achieve compliance with the UNCRC.” Without such compliance, the Scottish Government runs the risk of legal challenge.”
“As we have heard, the bill as now drafted allows a young person to opt back into those activities if they have been opted out of them, but not to opt out themselves. The Scottish Human Rights Commission, Together—the Scottish Alliance for Children’s Rights, the Humanist Society Scotland and the Children and Young People’s Commissioner Scotland are totally united in saying that the bill must include that extra provision. I appreciate that the Scottish Government listened to those experts and supported my amendment to create a power to introduce an independent right to withdraw via regulations. However, because my amendment 7A was not accepted today, there remains no requirement to introduce or even consult on those regulations, and there is no timeline either. It is possible that that power could sit on the books for years and not be used.”
“We believe that UNCRC incorporation is the start, not the end, of ensuring that everything that we do upholds the rights of children and young people. Despite the convention’s incorporation, our age of criminal responsibility is still just 12, which is lower than the age of 16 as recommended by the UN Committee on the Rights of the Child, and even lower than its supposed absolute minimum of 14. The Education (Scotland) Act 1980 allows children to be withdrawn from religious activities in schools without their consent and without even asking for their views to be taken into account. That is clearly contrary to the convention, and I welcome the opportunity to correct that, but a major problem remains.”
“I begin by thanking a number of people who have helped us get to this point today. As ever, the legislation team are unsung heroes, expertly drafting amendments, often at very short notice. Without their work, we would not be here. I also thank the clerking and Scottish Parliament information centre teams of the Equalities, Human Rights and Civil Justice Committee for guiding us through stages 1 and 2. The Parliament has been on a journey towards better recognising and protecting the rights of children and young people. In 2024, we enshrined the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child into Scots law. Before that, my Green colleague John Finnie ensured that all children are protected from physical assault.”
“If we wished to amend the Education (Scotland) Act 1980 later, how would his amendment interact with that? I would be grateful if the member could address those points now or in his contribution.”
“Amendment 22 would support best practice and ensure that all pupils can take part without compromise to their personal beliefs. In cases in which elements of an RO activity might not meet the criteria that the court specified—that is, if it involves asking pupils to pray, worship, sing hymns or affirm their belief in God—parents and pupils will be empowered to act in line with their conscience. Turning to the other amendments in the group, amendment 21, which was lodged by Elena Whitham, is in the same vein and would require ministers to clarify what constitutes religious observance. I support that, in the belief that clarity is important. I am unsure about the need for Paul O’Kane’s amendment 24, and I have a question as to whether it could confuse or potentially prevent certain things later on.”
“Therefore, amendment 22 would require all grant-funded schools, except denominational schools, to inform parents and pupils at least 14 days before any planned religious observance in the school about the format and content of that observance and any alternative learning provision for pupils who are withdrawn. The amendment would also require an assessment of whether the information that is conveyed in any planned religious observance in the school is “sufficiently objective, critical and pluralistic”. Amendment 22A would apply that provision to denominational schools as well. A court judgment recently ruled that the parental right to withdraw from religious observance is a necessary but insufficient mechanism for protecting parents’ and children’s human rights and that the observance must be objective, critical and pluralistic.”
“However, in the bill, the remaining references to religious education use the original terminology of the Education (Scotland) Act 1980 of “religious instruction”, which is an ambiguous phrase that could blur the important distinction between religious education and religious observance. My amendments 6 and 11 are tidying up exercises to avoid that confusion. Amendment 22 is aimed at facilitating the exercise of the rights in the bill. Parents and pupils cannot meaningfully exercise those rights unless they know when religious observance is happening and what form it will take.”
“As a result of stage 2 amendments that I lodged and that were supported, children and young people will have additional rights around withdrawal from religious observance but not religious education. We should not force children and young people into religious observance, which is also understood as worship, but it is equally important that they cannot withdraw from religious education, which is a core part of the curriculum. As a society that respects those of all faiths or of no faith, and those who are not sure, it is important that children and young people receive education in different faith and non-faith beliefs. It is also important that they receive education to understand the diverse society in which we all live.”
“I begin these stage 3 proceedings by thanking the Cabinet Secretary for Education and Skills and her team for the many conversations that we have had about the bill over a very short period of time. I am grateful for that. We will come on to some of the areas of disagreement and agreement, but I want to put that on record. I am also grateful to my colleagues on the Equalities, Human Rights and Civil Justice Committee and to all the organisations that have contributed so much to the development of amendments and by giving their views on the bill. I turn to the first group. In giving children and young people the right to withdraw, it is important that we are absolutely clear about the meaning and character of religious education.”
“I give her a commitment that I will take that away and respond to her formally in detail. Her point about inequality is well made. We need a whole-system approach, and the commission’s report is challenging on the issue of what more must be done to embed prevention.”
“I am grateful to Martyn Evans and the commission for their detailed and well evidenced recommendations. There is substantial evidence about how poverty, trauma and inequality drive offending and about the lifelong negative impact of incarceration on women and other marginalised groups. Given that, and following on from Fulton MacGregor’s question, will the cabinet secretary commit to clear, whole-Government engagement that links justice reform with anti-poverty and public health strategies? Will she also ensure that there are equality impact assessments of high imprisonment rates, early release measures and the potential reforms, particularly for women, young people, disabled people and racialised minorities? Angela Constance: There was a lot in Ms Chapman’s ask.”
“For many, cybercrime, online fraud and digital exploitation now pose greater threats than violence by strangers. If we misread risk, we misallocate resources. Community policing must be rooted in equality, justice, accountability and compassion. If we want trust, we must earn it through consistency, protection of rights and a commitment to tackle harm wherever it arises. 16:21”
“Protecting free speech and the right to peaceful assembly must mean protecting those who stand against racism, not leaving them to defend themselves. Taking hate seriously means acting early, consistently and visibly. Community policing must mean standing with those who are targeted by hate, not treating them as collateral in a public order calculation. Policing does not exist in isolation, and I appreciate Labour’s comments about officers being pulled into supporting people who are facing mental health crises or waiting for court processes to happen—that is not fair or right. If we are serious about community safety, we must think across portfolios—mental health provision, anti-poverty work, youth services and housing. Prevention is not a slogan; it requires investment. We must also be honest about where the risk is shifting.”
“Why does peaceful protest appear to attract a heavy response, while racist intimidation appears to go unchallenged?” What about consistency in the application of laws around stirring up hatred? At anti-immigrant demonstrations, individuals have openly called for the mass deportation of all black and brown people from Scotland, repeated antisemitic conspiracy theories or worse. There have been patterns of harassment: people have been followed, targeted and subjected to malicious allegations. Are we waiting for serious bodily harm to occur before intervention is deemed to be justified? Where is the bar for recognising intimidation and instigation? Police Scotland must take seriously its responsibility to rebuild trust.”
“Last year, in its 20th year, Aberdeen’s anti-racism march was attacked by members of a known racist and anti-immigrant group, who verbally and physically assaulted people who were attending a peaceful community event. The police did not prevent the confrontation, nor did they effectively stop it while it was happening. Instead, anti-racists stepped in to protect one another. That is not policing by consent; that is a failure of protection. We have seen armed police deployed to arrest peaceful protesters who demonstrate against the genocide in Palestine—protesters who were later cleared of wrongdoing in court. Communities are left asking, “What are the police up to? What about proportionality and priorities?”
“At the same time, perceptions of safety tell a more complicated story. Many people— particularly women, racialised communities, LGBTQIA+ people and disabled people—still feel unsafe in their daily lives. That fear is real. However, responding to it requires us to understand where risk truly lies and to tackle its root causes: poverty, inequality, trauma, exclusion and the erosion of the public services that once held communities together. Nowhere is the gap between rhetoric and reality clearer than in how we respond to racism and the rise of the far right. In the north-east, far-right groups have sought to organise and intimidate.”
“When we talk about community policing, what we are really talking about is the values that we think should be at the heart of our communities, and we are talking about safety. Safety is not simply the absence of crime; it is the presence of justice, dignity and trust. That must be the foundation of how we approach policing in our communities. Much is often made of violent crime, and it is right that we take harm seriously. However, we also need honesty and perspective. Long-term trends show that recorded violent crime in Scotland has generally fallen over recent decades. That trend matters, because it challenges the narrative of constant escalation that is so often used to justify fear-based policies. It reminds us that safety cannot be built on panic, sensationalism or punitive reflexes, but on evidence, prevention and care.”
“One of the commitments that I gave on the Government’s part was that I would try to use the new Institution of Structural Engineers guidance specifically on housing in RAAC in Scotland to negotiate a better outcome for those who are looking to buy or sell properties that have been remediated. That was the subject of our leadership meeting last week, and I believe that progress is being made. Housing to 2040 (Adaptations) 7.”
“There are serious concerns that just covering up the RAAC will not deal with the issue and could jeopardise mortgages and insurance. Can the cabinet secretary give an update on how communications and engagement are progressing in Dundee to ensure that there is genuine community involvement? Màiri McAllan: I urge Dundee City Council to continue to ensure that it provides transparent and clear advice and appropriate support for residents who are affected by RAAC. Maggie Chapman was quite right to mention the public meeting that I attended in Dundee on the topic.”
“Their feedback included written communications, including letters, engagement with the Association of British Insurers on behalf of residents, updated communication strategies, regular monitoring and inspections of RAAC, pilot projects, dedicated RAAC staff and regular reporting to their committee and elected members. Maggie Chapman: Last August, the cabinet secretary attended a public meeting in Dundee, at which an undertaking was given that people who were affected by RAAC and campaigning for a fair resolution would be properly involved in processes and decisions. However, that has not happened. Dundee City Council has indicated that it will roll out its roof- reinforcing pilot to the rest of the city, but that pilot has started without any consultation.”
“To ask the Scottish Government how it is ensuring that the local authorities involved with the reinforced autoclaved aerated concrete housing leadership group are engaging appropriately and are including residents and RAAC campaigners in their activities. (S6O-05472) The Cabinet Secretary for Housing (Màiri McAllan): It is my expectation that local authorities will engage with tenants and residents in their area as we work on solutions. As part of last week’s RAAC in housing leadership group, I sought an update from local authorities and registered social landlords on the support that they are providing to residents.”